Skip to main content

tv   After Words Jane Harman Insanity Defense  CSPAN  July 9, 2021 10:03pm-11:06pm EDT

10:03 pm
coverage, the scandal in which agents brought prostitutes to the hotel protocol making arrangements for president obama to visit columbia and we talk with her about her in-depth look in the book, subtitled the rise and fall of the secret service. >> on this episode of - listen at or whatever you get your podcasts. [inaudible]. >> wilson center president jane harman has written a book called "insanity defense" and she argues the past administration has failed to confront some of the most challenging national security issues and offered some recommendations to make the u.s. veteran future and she's interviewed by janet napolitano former homeland secretary during the obama administration printed and this is former democratic california congresswoman and wilson center president emerita.
10:04 pm
>> rep. jane harman good to see you and i enjoyed your book and you have titled it "insanity defense". why title it that way. jane: after this i would say a couple of things, or interrogatory or whatever you are my friend just to point out that there are some very long friendships and politics and policy and i was thinking about it that in the 70s, mid- 70s perhaps on each of us was five years old. and janet napolitano was an associate in the law firm are treated principal's name was john frank and my name is jane frank at the time. i met her and she was smart as a whip. no surprise. that it gone of the big political in arizona and then came to washington to become secretary of homeland security when i was in congress on the
10:05 pm
homeland security committee rated and then we went to california. where i'm still resident and a new her in her carnation at the university of california system and now she is a berkeley which is headed by waterfront chancellor general, i just wanted to say that not only can remember this, i kudos my friend. but a spectacular career so far. so have the world did i name this book "insanity defense". it's getting so much attention. it was notified idea actually had a w very boring title. and it fit relevant to the topic i was talking to my fourth child, daughter who is a writer and i said so i'm writing this book and here a is what is this about an here's the title. and she said that is so boring. the right title is "insanity defense". just out of her mouth.
10:06 pm
andse that tells what you're talking about and i said sold. and what it means i'm sure will know, is that doing the same over again and expecting different results is the definition of insanity is what i talked about over three decades printed. >> right in your book is a fascinating exposition of that particular your time in congress. but why don'ty you share with or viewers how you came to be a member of congress give them a little bit of the story of jane harman. jane: so i grew up in los angeles, and i'm still in california. i and with my then boyfriend, i'm touch with, i in
10:07 pm
went to the democratic national convention in los angeles in 1960. believe me, i was ten years old. we got out of the convention. is not massive security backk in the day. and i saw the nomination of john kennedy and i met eleanor roosevelt and some of the other luminaries freighted in that moment, and life is that he loved politics. i was measure the los angeles coliseum or kennedy gave his speech and i had active in politics in high school. i koran my democratic in college and was just talk. i went to law school because i thought that my husband showed me that this these of people serving in congress they are
10:08 pm
lawyers. and that was i was it when i was interested in. and then i practice law briefly but migrated to the senate were i was seen read to california senator name john honey and that's when got involved with john frank because i inherited a subcommittee working on access to lawyers. and he was that i think either the hanover a senior member of the american arts association but anyway i work for him for five years. anytime on there was almost no women in roles like that. and i got to work in the carter white house and for two years i was then the secretary and then was a practicing lawyer and so forth during the dark years of the reagan administration prayed and actually there werehe also dark. and then i found the opportunity to run for congress where i had
10:09 pm
grown up and it was kind of dark, the lines and changed pretty and after ten years. and what i thought was a democratic seat became a republican state. but they were most likely to wind and through registration and i went against the odds. one of my opponents was maureen ragan, daughter of ronald reagan was then retired. and was helping her when however, the california pretty party elected someone else my private. and far more conservative and not pro-choice. and maureen megan greg it was pro-choice. as that issue in 1992. clarence thomas for anybody remembers that pretty and it was the year of the woman.
10:10 pm
women doubled the number of seats in congress and two women to work elected for my state andtors, dianne feinstein barbara in hindsight is still serving. and it was a great ride. so it really was gagging on the partisanship and that was why i left. that was in 2011 and i went to succeed lee hamilton, a wonderful mentor and friend. and in washington and then it just like that for ten years. i'm now adamant top and planning my next career. janet: and now you're an author as well pretty. jane: yes and i am an author and by the way, far worse be for my family but one upside for me is
10:11 pm
is been a huge amount of time in the house pretty but i also wrote the book that have been planning to write for b years. janet: so there is a lot of the book about 911 and is aftermath. one of the results of the attack of 911 was the decision to create a new department of homeland security pretty sure a little bit about the thinking behind that. and has the department met your expectations. jane: i've already said in a might be familiar madame secretary that you are one of the occupants running the department over the years. there is back story and i told in the book. the government was not prepared
10:12 pm
for 911 and i think every single person seems to know that in spite of warnings by several commissions that i actually serve on one and the terrorism that was active because u.s. in the first world trade center bombing prayed in the morning of an africa. in spite of that are government was not prepared basically caught flat-footed and wanted to major intelligence failures freighted with initial. in the other one was totally wrong estimate of what this event in iraq which caused him to invade iraq. but anyway, after 911 the good news, it was horrible but the good news was that the country reacted as a country. america reacted, it wasn't gu it's your fault it's not her fault. but most political parties voted to gather strategies to make
10:13 pm
america safer and better and one of the things we did early was to authorize use military forcez in afghanistan against his attackers. but many of us and i had a position on thend intelligence committee and in 2004, the homeland security committee and i became a member of that as well. we chaired a it in the intelligt subcommittee anyway, we did think that there ought to be homeland security dedicated function in the white house. and president bush 43, created one. and former governor, was in the post. and tell funny stories about that. but any rate, we, the parties on capitol hill, bipartisan hot deposition should have more power to directos homeland response throughout the government we were not plotting
10:14 pm
to create a new department. but what happened was that we are just increasing and it was clear there were missed clickean 911. and one of them was a an fbi in the midwest and noticed before 911 that some folks were taking find instructions, air flights your point, you know pilot training. yes but they were not interested in taking off lending only interested in how to fly the plane. which obviously caught the attention of instructors. they reported to the fbi in this woman name-calling rally wrote the report about this and said that the fbi would cut look very little attention until about a
10:15 pm
god major attention the newspapers i think the new york times. the rally memo was about to hit the front page when out of nowhere it seems that any carson chief of staff had time a prison bush 43, basically announced that they deported and department of t homeland securiy and the 88 departments and agencies requested will be put under one banner and the combined to protect the homeland. and of course is now an amount announcement it off the front page and there was president bush 43 supported a new work onnt so that we capitolol hill and oh my goodne. how did this happen. and what do we do and we decided that although we had been in favor of a smaller part in the white house, this was going to get t - because this president
10:16 pm
supported it and we were better off supporting it rather than opposing it. because he didn't want to stronger homeland function over time the became this new department. which was a gigantic organization of government and there were some kinks along the wayhe and so are but i would say now w i don't know if it's quite two decades yet but two decades then, they're shorting out that he can do a lot of things that are useful for the government and people of gotten used to the reorganization. huge i'm sure you ask me about this, huge issues with immigration on the borders and with cyber issues with terrorism. in all of those is going could under the umbrella of the department of the homeland. janet: the department of
10:17 pm
homeland security is largest reorganization of the federal government since the creation of the department ofef defense aftr more work to. i will acknowledge that pains along the way pretty kind of reorg like that is challenging. but i also would agree that department now, i'm going to exclude the trump years with the department now is very much involved since its initial state. if one thing that happened of course about it is congressional oversight pretty human tendency that there are any committees and subcommittees of congress that exercise some come jurisdiction over the department
10:18 pm
of homeland security and doou yu think there's any realistic way for that to be reformed. that was one of the recommendations in the 911 commission. for one election yet. jane: misspoke it was actually only 22 functions. only the largest in the pentagon. congress did have 88 committees and subcommittees with some piece of jurisdiction overe the homeland security for the price predict that scepter. andis i remember unless in your case but michael another secretary to homeland security, is a bush appointee. anotherte excellent secretary. summa correct that the 911
10:19 pm
commission which was created bipartisan cochaired by jean hamilton and my predecessor at the local center. and a former governor of new jersey recommended it freedom answer that is i was in the 19th century structure and agriculture think about that pretty cannot diminishing the fact that the major industry in some states in the country but i think the resources. so some of these resources and i was on the committee for eight years. and the frustration was reluctantly wanted to do something and we discovered that we didn't have the jurisdiction
10:20 pm
to do it. it was actually. >> the city. the chairman of the company who was and still is, and mississippi is to ask for more jurisdiction. and will consider it and will consider it printed don't hold your breath rated but it is the largest unfulfilled suggestion of the 911 and i predict it will be unfilled for a while longer pretty. janet: [laughter] us have a true another impact of 911 in america mentioned this the decision to invade iraq. which is supported at the time. but is based on serious mistakes in the intelligence. given all of the intelligence agency etc. for the federal
10:21 pm
government, which are analysis and how we got the intel so wrong. jane: will back amanda, mentioned in the 47 national security act that created events department structure. it also created our intelligence structure. what created was a couple of little old lady agencies one of which was called the cia which had a management function of our community. over the intelligence community. cia things went along over the years the cia was very much challenged in the technology department pretty to basically what io was elected to congress in 1992, the first cold war crash in the year of the woman.
10:22 pm
i got very interested in all of this appeasement congressional district in california with satellites we were building up a technology. but againin we had a bunch of silos, humanbu intelligen. e and mostly what we were listening to was from satellites in each one in a silo. then we had the fbi in different places. as i have said often, no business in the world can operate in 1947 business model now. this was two decades ago. so leading up to the iraq war and that's what you asked me after the major intelligence failure on 911, when a bunch of talented service folks who
10:23 pm
didn't talk to each other. they did not connect the dots. and we also had an ticket cheney, then the vice president and a few others, some ideological at the time who believed in the theory, i guess you would call it sort of the freedom very that if we knockoff, the bad guys, we cannot give up, we could change iraq into a democracy and that idea would have a domino effect on changing any of the governments. and so they were called neoconservatives. there were two things going on friday before the iraq national intelligence and it prayed and one was in a theory of change that they wanted to support with
10:24 pm
the arguments and the other was the intelligence community was immune and pen community. so we ended up with cherry picked sloppily assembled the case for invading iraq. and shame on me, and send the book. everything, the supporting evidence they had, i read the intelligence carefully the traveled the united kingdom and prison which had and still has extremely competent intelligence agency. the traveled too middle east. i came home and is in the book. sidney harman, i read everything. because i believed that i didn't believe the neocon theory of democracy but i did believe that the intelligence show that america was possibly could be
10:25 pm
attacked especially biological weapons. and also building nuclear plants in any way i came home and i told my late husband was a wanted businessman. and i give him this book. it gives me this look pretty and he said you're going to do what and i said i read everything, you don't know anything about this. have a major successful business but you haven't done the homework. any said, that's a lot of crap. and you will see. guess what, it turns out he was a better intelligence animal and lesser oversight person the night. and later on the key sources, a german guy had never been vetted
10:26 pm
by us the germans told us that he was unreliable. we also learned that the state department intelligence function it called inr was or did not believe the case in the and ie and it was embarrassed and that led to one of the successful things and then predict and made a lot of mistakes which was one small group which accomplish one of the other recommendations ofe 911 commission which was established coordinating functis the intelligence community called the offices of director of national intelligence party to. janet: i was just going to go there. in the story of the creation of the oh dni or dni director of national intelligence is really a signature accomplishment of your time in the congress.
10:27 pm
and i am not sure that can be created in today's world and the congress but maybe you could share with the viewers some of the ins and outs what you went through to bring that legislation over the goal line. jane: well let's understand the finally back to 2004, which is centuries ago and political time. and that was the time when the parties talked to each other and was much more functional place. i actually thought about - they actually put the country first and some people watching this i think that is delusional. but i lived through this. in a dead pretty good probably all of you did most of you but it any rate, setting up his command function was a recommendation of the 911 commission and it also was a recommendation of something
10:28 pm
called the joint inquiry, of 911. and that was a group, it was intelligence community house and senate and that together try this. democrats and republicans, altogether, bipartisan by carol. you're probably wondering if i'm taking my meds today. this was ing the capitol of the intelligence used to be in the capitol pretty which many thought was the intended target fore 911. but any rate, one of the cute stories is all of us piled in there, too many so they had set up card tables and cover them with paper cloth like a kitty party. and i would call it the getty
10:29 pm
chair and i sat on. a lot of friendships were formed then. think dan coats was that my getting table dan coats, republican, fine. later became investor of germany that ultimately the dni so he was pushed out on top. this is a conservative republican. and he back to serve but anyway, so that was recommendation of 911 the joint inquiry. so i and others the legislation to create this function. it was pretty quickly done in the house even though there was strong often opposition by some republicans one of whom was vice president cheney and another who was hunter by the father who then shared the committee but,
10:30 pm
my german, pete, a republican from michigan and i stayed close he was very brave to do it. we ultimately got the bill passed in the house it was even harder in the senate later. colin sold republican member northeast. for susan collins, the intern at the time from the senate homeland community and joeco lieberman who was first a democrat and then an independent. so is lieberman and collins and we were the big four working out the differences in the bills. i'm sorry. but we did it. we met late at night in the office of the speaker, of course i tell the story we drank all of his wine read there's another
10:31 pm
cute story aboutut susan and james, going out after one of these means have a nightcap at a hotel near the hill and. [inaudible]. well cspan folks what is nowhere this is. and some guy comes over with two glasses of wine and i thought what is sos goiter was a four pretty t and all it was was a g, how nice, they must be sisters they want to celebrate. that's what happened. and it was hard we got it done and it took a while like everything else to get his sea legs but i think right now under his first woman director.
10:32 pm
janet: talk a little bit about your relationship with senator collins. i found that one of the really nice insights of the book. maybe you could say a few words pretty. jane: so now there are a lot of women in the house and senate be back monday, there wereme about0 house. out of 435, not a huge percentage but now there are over 100 in the senate. i think 25 percent female or maybe more actually. but anyway, what happened still happens as the women get along by a large. the women caucuses in each house. you're very protective and i think there are monthly dinners in the senate, not sure what happens in the house. seems to be a steep decline in
10:33 pm
terms of civility so i don't know if they still meet predict susan and i became friends for anotherer senator, arizon senator, thought we would like each other. i washo republican and he and i worked closely together and doing well and he said i want to introduce you to my colleagues susan. then we were paired on this dni project and we just clicked is in the book harry truman was wrong and he said that if you want to go to washington could get a dog predict nothing that is wrong but i think in my life, my dogwa died. i don't have dog friend. in my life, he wanted printed washington getting often ik describe carefully the relationships i've had with women mentors even before he
10:34 pm
served. missus and i the friendship endured. we agree on everything. in fact be specifically disagreed on a couple of big ones. the last few years, the friendship endures when she got engaged, i went to crazy. and among other things, big engagement party in my home. is a big bipartisan gathering. i don't know if that could happen anymore fighting to tried other wedding dresses in my house. she married, counting and there is, for ten minutes and getting married was horrific. it was family gathering. in a very small area and i
10:35 pm
finally arrived and nine hours later, just in time for her rehearsal dinner. there she was standing outside in thehe rain. she said you should not have come. this way too hard for you. it's been a good friend ship and it means a lot to make. and think aar lot to her. tell you that so much, it made serving their so much better. maybe still makes her service there better because we still have each other. janet: yeah, one of the chapters is entitled fog of law. that was a wonderful chapter
10:36 pm
title. now marketing back to days not only as a member of congress but as a very very good lawyer pretty and it maybe you describe for the viewers what you mean by the fog of law. this is also an aftermath of the invasion of iraq. jane: okay, well yes it's also relates to our sing in afghanistan and we accomplished the immediate mission authorized by congress and ended up with a lot of problems. many of them. there was a fog of armenia law left unclear what we should be doing in the fall of law, the term was adapted from the fog and many had sent for years very unclear to go into the battle or even into a war.
10:37 pm
and one of the questions i now ask myself about everything in life, is one that retired general always ask and he's become a very good friend. he's involved in afghanistan and iraq. rent central command him cia director in my time pretty so i know him well. this question is, how will this end. we didn't ask that question enough. so the fog of law was entitled the speaker gave the georgetown law school. about a year after iraq work maybe it washe i'm not exactly sure what it was but i sort of brought up all the things that we were doing it and some of which we are still doing great is too hard to answer the questions. said that it's very clear especially to folks like to be
10:38 pm
the actors turning out these programs. what are they supposed to do and you only have legal framework around the whole thing. the turnout for example, the first term of bush 43 that a lot of what we were doing in the surveillance areaa was not in compliance i didn't know it at the time. not in compliance with the laws with the surveillance intelligence act. it wasn't because vice president cheney and others assumed congress would not do a good job and maybe even should be cut out.en to cover these things are what they do, they went to the justice department and got the office of legal, an in-house lawyer and justice department to write opinions justifying what
10:39 pm
they were doing pretty so when i asked the question, is what you're doing in full compliance with the law, the answer but i awould get but was not in full compliance with the law of congress. but it was one of justice department and one of many people heard of. legal opinions printed by john hughes, now jr professor at berkeley law school. they had to do the definition of turk and other things printed and as to how we interrogated those in connection with afghanistan and iraq. janet: your definition was the torture yes those detained in connec modeling harm,ha no, imminent death pretty. >> series organ failures. our imminent death. that is the definition of torture which does not reply
10:40 pm
with the definition of u.s. law. n failure. >> guest: serious organ fill your eminent that was after world war ii. so you were just freelancing and jenny wanted the definition. and he was question afterwards on his legal reasoning and the guys question him, and they also drop doing this pretty. janet:t: yeah, the fog of law refers to surveillance and refers to how we treat detainees, and it also concerns we do about guantánamo.
10:41 pm
as we refer to it often. he described in the book, some of the legal issues with respect to help we treat whether they have actually committed the acts of which they are being detained. the closing gizmo, what you started putting people there, is very difficult. let me ask you this question. there are still inmates being held at gitmo, what would you advise president invited to do about t that. of myso again, one mistakes as i described the book was going there for the first time when we hastily set it up actually had prison facility built so what did we do we made
10:42 pm
it out of chicken wire to create different cells and just imagine guys taking off the battlefield door the places where these chicken wires and called the cages by the way all president system of communicating workout then and we anticipated almost nothing as i get to gitmo and the congressional members but in the lunch between airfield in actual prison getting overwater and i asked why this is prison here pretty did he said, to be beyond reach of law. now janet, you are, skilled lawyer. you know that i actually knew as well. i'm sorry i didn't go by did go to harvard law school and i knew cannot build a present that way.
10:43 pm
and that was not constitutional and it took some years to come to that conclusion. there entitled to u.s. lawyers and process and why didn't i say anything, yes, i thought maybeth something i don't understand is asked after 911 and maybe basically i would be putting the country danger. we brought people there would been treated or suffered the torture that didn't meet the definition. so many cases, or in some cases, these folks were water boarded. those one of the techniques i briefed on that.
10:44 pm
in other things that was not complying with u.s. definition of torture son legal targeting of the evidence against him was was tainted because improper names were used to get it printed so people go to guantanamont bay, there used toe hundreds number down to 40. in one of them might a guy was water boarded numerous times and what we do, keeping their. dan lawyers talk about military commissions. my proposal might include this, is that congress never had
10:45 pm
what's called an intention, they had the stats in that status, their situations that were reviewed on a periodic basis. they really seem to try but they certainly could be treated and more formal way and i would argue that it be closed and they should be moved to the united states. i don't buy it is huge danger to our communities because we actually did try to get 400 people after 911 it or even after the first attack on the world trade center printed in there in super max prisons, really guarded places and there's no evidence and anywhere in the state so we are talking about 40 folks who could be putting this preventative tension program and moved into it max prisons someplace and we would close gitmo which is a
10:46 pm
stain on the u.s. role blocked and also a recruiting tool for the bad guys. this now the united states treats people. their culture is corrupted we've a right to protect them. janet: you mentioned this a bit earlier and you touchre on it a bit earlier but the administration and the time supported something called the dealer military of the secretary and one of his big proponents is david addington who i when the public high school with in albuquerque, new mexico. d however, really with it executive is that anytime the president is acting in any kind of international capacity, yes
10:47 pm
all authority in congress is just kind of a bit player. and it is kind of an intention the runs through the book. the tension between the executive branch of the legislative branch pretty can you talk about that a little bit. jane: sure, jenny's lawyer and i had a couple of challenges i described one ofbi them pretty s a court right man read so anyway. jane: he. janet: was the best man at my brother's wedding. speech of my my mind, so the constitution can set up three branches of government. under article one from the executive branch under article two of the courts under article three. in the legislative branch
10:48 pm
article one, the laws and the executive branches supposedly carries out the laws. subject to review by the legislative branch to make sure the administration is the handling of matters under the law is done properly and then the federal courts decide if the law passed by congress passed under the constitution affrighted that's how it's supposed to work. the declaration of powers really good context over art 2130 plus years. and were pretty well in congress was i think enormously skilled at that foreign policy over the years. until it wasn't until it started the slippery slope to political and toxic partisanship. but at any rate, the cheney
10:49 pm
addington theory of the executive meeting that we will do what we thank you so right, the president is commander-in-chief of that is true. and designated that an article to read it and if and when we feel like it, let congress know what we are doing will justify the basis of what we are doing by a series of legal opinions issued by the government. we talked about this. and certainly after 911, the president exercised these functions. so it is really hard in congress, senior role on an oversight committee to get information. i mentioned already that i kept asking if we are fully complied with laws they answered yes to the laws they were talking about was the opinion not law congress passed.
10:50 pm
and i think there is still an overreach i think the book to last chapters are about the powerful executive in the last chapter is incredible shrinking congress. it is unhealthy. and so to branch for to take over everything, spreads for parties that are people who are serious elected to public office into congress. country were party and try to solve problems. janet: right, and you mentioned several times a hyper partisanship then congress today. what is your analysis about how to flat or how that has happened and what risks opposes to the american people. jane: while there may be as it
10:51 pm
turns out that there were times during the founding of our country and the federalist papers and other documents were enacted about or a lot of noise pretty but what i am seeing is that over time our institution got better, not try putting any anythingng in the law, at leastn my lifetime of the late '80s when something called the negative and was invented by the campaign consultant. and it turns out is a rent from congress many times another's that maybe there's much more to this as well. and penetrates much faster, people just go online to the negative information. and it has been perfected so that was one of the tools the
10:52 pm
kind of fractured nausea between democrats and republicans and then we also happened that i think the hearings supreme court nominations of supreme court in the late '80s the first time for the party also engaged in some of this. i think ted kennedy and great senator may notot agree with me and joe biden and chairman of the senate judiciary committee running the hearings make not agree with me but is an extremely contentious and hearing. and it ended in not being confirmed so in the '90s, the beginning of this slippery slope to where we are pretty lucky me, i came to congress in the '90s pretty nice a lot of this up close and personal pretty gingrich in the book, i actually
10:53 pm
was in a conversation with him about the book. on his blog. but his theory of the case was we discussed the majority from the republicans in 1994, we have to be partisan he even said that in that was very helpful and he said to me, as we were talking about his blog, we certainly looked at you so we figured we could not take you out. so i mean, this is because they wanted to take me out because i was not responsible and not bipartisan that was my hope and he said no because i was one of the members of the democratic team. and they wanted so that attitude of take out the other side, you don't get enough power you don't get reelected, that's where we are sadly today. janet: do you think that
10:54 pm
congress is currently configured is up to the task of national security and all of the oversight function etc. that needs to be done now predict. jane: i think that some members of congress, george will was accused of being a liberal, just wrote about jack reed, who is a democrat from rhode island cared the senate armed services committee has for a long time, former veteran. as masters from kennedy school and he knows a boat load about national tech and he something only one but what i am saying and will was all about how we really have to refocus has been money and defense. i completely agree with this.
10:55 pm
but my point is, there really good members off congress i can in the certainly was. they were extraordinary members of congress. so members of congress and some of them served on these relative communities most people try tora get on committees in their district as i did over their expertise in congress function to better and if something called the regular order means that committees reported the four and but the committees do before the laws are passed. before all that happens, i was might have the expertise and might attractor better people of the expertise that would share. it's a meat grinder now if you run for congress, so many
10:56 pm
districts and have very shrill people on either end. the left and the right causing you to anywhere in the center of solve problems. bipartisanship is a dirty word and it is tragic. if we lose. the whole country. not easy to get elected to congress we don't follow the bed and get elected to congress or attorney general of state or governor of state or whatever. so, you're could tell off to get elected butge presumably, the motivations you have assuming the country better pretty and you get into an institution where you can't do that. because you on one side and they are on the other side and the efforts to work together are basically discounted.
10:57 pm
and politically dangerous. janet: i totally agree with that predict were almost to the end of our time together pretty coming ask you if you give a few closing reflections on what you think are the major risks facing the country today. as opposed too when you came to congress. jane: toxic partisanship. as we speak today, we are watching a couple of things, from the last week's happening in the republican caucus in the house. liz cheney the daughter of s cheney, who bravely spoke truth got kicked out of ownership of the republican side. a lot of jokes were made about her and her father.
10:58 pm
but she's a serious member of congress. whether you agree with her or not. the way it was handled was very unfortunate. and then today, this whole effort about forming a commission, modeled after the 911 commission. as sadly so far as i know, is amenable live to congress but the 911 boat was strongly bipartisan and respect for the leaders of the 911 commission in hamilton was strong across the country respect for their inclusions were strong pretty soon we know. the first serious insurrection against our country has been thoroughly investigated on a bipartisan basis. i find whatt really happened and
10:59 pm
then serious recommendations to prevent it from happening getting are considered by congress that worked to protect the country. that is what we should want and neither of those is happening. so i think toxic partisanship is at the top of my list. i think the breakdown of community and institutions is there as well predict country and people in their silos. in their init their own chamber. those are huge huge dangers. and then i would say certainly focusing on the u.s. things that the biden administration have identified things that are big dangers for our country prayed there's progress inhi the u.s. is the nd to be progress in the world. in order to prevent this from coming back pretty is a human
11:00 pm
tragedy still here but especially ine other countries, is gigantic. the biden wanted foreign policy, i think he is doing outreach to help the entire world to the medicines that invented here delivered by logistics even better than anyone else. ... ... dust. pandemic and climate. if you come from california to tinderbox and dry across the entire state. the third issue is isolation and >> i just saw in today's news
11:01 pm
with russia and the secretary of state is meeting in the arctic which is where they cooperate with russia and the biden administration with the sanctions with the pipeline. and skirting ukraine going to germany with a very contentious thing because it is russia like the invasion nation of ukraine and crimea but europe engaged sanctions and angela merkel was very popular for germany nowhere
11:02 pm
else but the conclusion meeting this is we are trying to offer a carrot to russia and they are working with us so all i'm saying is there's some interesting outreach by the biden administration and finally they came up with an international security strategy which is the first strategy i haveio seen over for presidencies and i make the point in my book the cold warom ended. >> thank you it is a wonderful book i cannot recommend it more highly anyone more interested the title of the
11:03 pm
book is insanity. thank you for spending some time with me. >> if you want a friend get a girlfriend and i value this friendship and we can go on for hours. >> thank you
11:04 pm
11:05 pm


info Stream Only

Uploaded by TV Archive on